revenue and how much and where does it come from. democrats are going to have to step up and do some tough things. >> congressman peter defazio is here to respond. >> ceos begin their campaign to roll back the social safety net. >> social security wasn't devised to be a system that will supported you for a 30-year retirement after a 25-year career. >> e.j. dionne responds to that ridiculous remark. >> plus, a fox news guest bursts the right wing bubble from the inside. >> i think that the emphasis on benghazi has been extremely political, partially because fox was operating as a wing of the republican party. and ohio state senator nina turner on what could be the smoking gun of evidence for the republican effort to suppress the minority vote. >> good to have you with us. thanks for watching. hope you had a great holiday. the white house is laying the ground work for the fiscal cliff grand bargain. but it could be a raw deal for the middle class, uh-oh, here we go.

new video of the university of delaware event with the senior white house advisor david plouffe shows what hand the democrats look to be playing. plouffe is one of the top members of the president's encircle. so when plouffe was asked about how to solve the deficit standoff, people should listen to this guy. plouffe said this is going to get hairy? >> we want to engage in comprehensive tax reform. we also need to engage in entitlement reform. you know? medicare, medicaid carefully, these are chief drivers of our deficit. we made a lot of progress with obama care and there's other spending we have to cut. >> hold on a second. i think we all know what the chief drivers of our deficit are and have been. our projected deficit over the next seven years is driven mostly by the wars in iraq and afghanistan and the bush tax cuts. entitlement programs don't even compete with these costs.

plouffe went on to pin the problem largely on republicans who are not flexible on higher tax rates, but he also said this. >> and so where i think the big bottleneck right now is republicans in congress on revenue and how much and where does it come from. democrats are also going to have to step up here and do some tough things. and you know, the notion that somehow that these deficits and our debt are not a threat to our national security and our economic future is something i could not disagree with more strongly, as does the president. there are some, maybe not so much in our party but some commentators on the left that suggest that we shouldn't deal with this at all voices on the lift are not saying the deficit is not a problem for our future. progressives understand we need to deal with our debt but they don't want to be -- see the burden of deficit reduction put on the backs of the people who can least afford it. the president campaigned on this

vision. and he won re-election. at least i think he did. but it also seems like the whitehouse white house is still considering another grand bargain. >> i think what we need to do and the president believes this is, let's go for the big deal. let's go for something that we can say for a 10 to 20-year period for the first time in a long time, our country is on the right sustainable fiscal path. the only way that gets done is for republicans to step out again and mercilessly get criticized by grover and norquist on the right. >> if this sounds familiar to you folks, it should because back income 2011, president obama brokered a deal with house speaker john boehner to avoid crashing through the debt ceiling. the deal was ultimately rejected by the republicans but we know it included cuts to the entitlement programs. according to "the new york times," president obama agreed to squeeze $250 billion from medicare in the next ten years

with $800 billion moral in the decade after that. he was also willing to cut 110 billion from medicaid in the short term. democrats in the senate make it sound like, you know, a deal like this could be worked out pretty soon. >> side of the table, bring entitlement reform into the conversation. social security set aside. when it comes to medicare and medicaid is, protect the integrity of the program but give it solvency for more and more years. >> what's the integrity of the program? we have a lot of questions here about where this is all going to end up. the republicans are giving off clues about an upcoming deal. several house and senate republicans are openly rejecting an antitax pledge of grover norquist. but as senator lindsey graham says, rejecting the pledge comes with strings attached. >> i will violate the pledge, long story short, for the good of the country only if democrats will do entitlement reform.

>> so get out the gun and hold it to our head, right? both democrat and republican w lawmakers are giving the impression that a deal can be reached as long as there are cuts near and dear to a lot of americans, medicare and medicaid. david plouffe's comments give credence to that idea. progressive lawmakers are thinking i thought we had the election. bernie sanders from vermont has spoken about the need to protect programs for the middle class. he released this statement to the ed show tonight what david plouffe has state concerns me deeply despite his assertions the american people have been clear both through their votes in the election and in poll after poll after poll at a time when the middle class is disappearing and the number of people living in poverty is at an all-time high. the american people have demanded there be no cuts to the social security, medicare

medicaid and the people in this country doing phenomenally well must be asked to play a significant role in reducing the deficit. here, here, bernie. i'm on board with that. the public agrees with senator sanders. i'm not the only one. in the latest cnn poll,ment 56% of americans believe taxes for the wealthy should be raised to help pay for programs such as medicare and medicaid. this is in line with exactly what president obama said on the campaign trail and in his first speech after winning re-election. the president said that he would not balance the budget on the backs of those who were already struggling in our society. now those people and the question is, are those people now being asked to bend a little bit? despite this tremendous victory that liberals had in november? i think it was november 6th, wasn't it? not real long ago. so here we are, i think, setting some very dangerous boundaries here that liberals have to get inside of if we're going to have

a deal and make the republicans happy. are you willing to give up medicare and medicaid, big cuts to make sure that the wealthiest can get away with the tax rates that they want? this, i'll tell you what, they just don't rest, do they? get your cell phones out. tonight's question, will democrats stand up for the middle class in fiscal cliff negotiations? text a for "yes," b for no to 622639. go do our blog at ed.msnbc.com. joining me tonight, congressman peter defazio of oregon. great to have you with us. how alarming do you think david plouffe's comments are? >> very concerned, ed. it's like the election didn't happen. it's kind of back to where the president was negotiating with the republicans when they had a stronger hand and threatening the full faith and credit of the united states of america and economic collapse. he won big about talking about taxing the upper income people.

and you know, not hitting the middle class with more cuts and social security, medicare, medicaid. social security not a penny to the debt or deficit. medicare, he wants a quart of a billion over ten years, easy. let's negotiate prescription drug prices like every other advanced industrial nation in the world does. that saves a quarter of a billion dollars a year for med care. medicaid is a key part of obama i don't know and what mr. plouffe was talking about. i think he got the republican talking points mixed up with his. >> you know what? that was my first impression when i saw the videotape, as well. the question comes up, what are you willing to accept in a deal when it comes to programs like medicare and medicaid? >> look, this december should be about revenues. then we can go on to have discussions about the long-term sol sency of medicare and where medicaid fits into obama care

and all the changes coming by 2014. but revenue's got to come first and should come first because we hold all the aces. we've got five in our hand because if we do nothing, all the tax cuts expire and then republicans don't have to worry about their pledge to grover norquist because what they're doing is voting to reduce taxes for middle income families and working americans and sorry, they just can't do anything about the millionaires and billionaires and the unearned income which is going to go back to clinton era rates which guess what, worked pretty darn well for the economy when clinton was president. >> i was surprised that david plouffe would bring up the idea of the grand bargain in the lame duck session of the congress. i think it's about revenue. this is about the legislation that they put in place about to expire after it was extended in the last lame duck session of the congress two years ago. and that was a two for one. one year of unemployment extension for two years of the bush tax cuts to take us to

where we are right now. it seems to me there's a little bit too much wiggle room on the part of the white house to start talking about a granted bargain and chipping away at medicare and medicaid when you don't have to. now, do you read it that way? >> absolutely. and remember, this congress is worse than the one that's coming in. we're going to have a strength in hand in the senate and the house is actually even going to be a little bit better with more democrats and 11 of the worst republicans lost their re-election. so i think you know, it's ridiculous to me that they should be talking about a bad grand bargain in december, you know, over the christmas holidays and the new year's when after january 1st, we're going to have an incredibly strong hand because if the republicans want to deal then to help us reduce taxes on middle income and working families and do some other rational things, then we're going to have a place for them at the table. >> why do i get this feeling that somebody in the white house

has just started the bus the one that they're going to use to run over liberals and say, hey, you've got to take this deal because we've got to fix thisening? the bottom line is we have not paid for iraq and afghanistan. and i realize that was on somebody else's watch but the bar tab's there right now and we need to deal with this right now. if it's about revenue and the republicans reject it, where do you think that leaves the negotiating hand for the democrats in the future? >> let's come back on january 3rd and let's talk about what we're going to do because everybody will be paying clinton era rates then. that actually would k4r5e9 trillion of deficit reduction. that's probably a little too much out of revenues over the short term. so let's go back to child tax credit and some middle income tax relief and that, but let's keep a substantial portion of that revenue and we don't have to the talking about stupid across the board cuts and do more targeted cutses in programs that need cutting and bolster

those that need bolstering. one thing it, no one's talking about within-third of the deficit is due to high unemployment. we should be talking about investment that will put americans back to work and that takes care of a third of the deficit. if you're talking about a grand bargain, okay, revenues putting people back to work and then we'll talking about cuts. >> that's a profound point. all of a sudden we're supposed to go into this grand bargain of medicare and medicaid because we went through recession and the tax base was low because there was a lot of people unemployed for months on end and we had to invest in the economy to where we've got it right now and moving forward? i think there's some fundamentals here that are in place that the republicans just seem to push right aside and say you got to go to entitlements. if we go to entitlements, if this country goes to entitlements and makes major changes, it will be as if they won the election and the democrats didn't congressman, appreciate your time. peter defazio of oregon. thank you.

remember to answer tonight's question. sthar your thoughts at ed show and on facebook. coming up, the corporate ceo publicity tour to cut middle class entitlements instead of their own corporate welfare. e.j. dionne will join us. stay with me. got a lot coming up johan comes in a porcelain vessel, . balented blonde from sweden. ♪ smooth, rich, never bitter, gevalia.

is a thrilling, dual-flavored ride to mouth fun-town. but it's not like everyone is going to break into a karaoke jam session. ♪ this will literally probably never happen.

>> corporate ceos want the middle class to bear the burden when it comes to deficit reduction. i'll talk with e.j. dionne next. then fox news can't handle the truth when a journalist calls out the network for hyping the benghazi attack. he got cut off. and democrats are beating the republicans at their own game when it comes to super pacs. we'll look how they're gearing up for 2016 with richard wolffe. use the hashtag ed show. we are coming right back. n color had to cost a fortune. nobody said an all-in-one had to be bulky. or that you had to print from your desk.

at least, nobody said it to us. introducing the business smart inkjet all-in-one series from brother. easy to use. it's the ultimate combination of speed, small size, and low-cost printing. that's the sound of car insurance companies these days. here a cheap, there a cheap, everywhere a cheap... you get it. so, what if instead of just a cheap choice, you could make a smart choice? like, esurance for example. they were born online and built to save people money from the beginning. it's what they've always done. not just something they cheap about. that's insurance for the modern world. esurance. now backed by allstate. click or call.

>> welcome back to "the ed show." thanks for watching tonight. a powerful group of corporate ceos are giving advice how to solve the country's deficit program and suggest cutting entitlements but say nothing about their own corporate welfare. here's ceo of goldman sachs lloyd blankfein taking aim at entitlements. >> you're going to have to undoubtedly do something to lower people's expectations, the entitlements and what people think they're going to get because it's not -- they're not going to get it. social security wasn't devised to be a system that supported you for a 30-year retirement after eight 25-year career. so there will be certain things that it the retirement age has to be changed, maybe some benefits have to be affected, maybe inflation adjustments have to be revises. in general, entitlements have to be slowed down and contained. >> who does a 25-year career. >> i wish i could have signed up for that program. time for a reality check here.

the average worker receives is social security benefits for 16 years, not 30 years. right now, social security has a $2.27 trillion surplus, and will be solvent through 2033 even if no changes are made. social security has nothing to doing with our deficit and debt problems in this country. it's a separate fund. the ceo of goldman sachs didn't seem to have a problem with $10 billion in federal bailouts, his company got back in 2008. goldman sachs repaid the money and has made billions of dollars in profits since then. but it's ceos, they want to cut retirement benefits to the middle class americans. they want them to pay for if it. here's honeywell ceo david could they suggesting something very similar. >> the big nut has to be medicare, medicaid. at the end of the day, you can't avoid the topic. especially with the baby boomer generation retiring. it's gog literally crush the

system. >> going to just crush us, man. it's going to crush us. very interesting considering how honeywell did not pay any corporate taxes between 2008 and 2010. in fact, it got $34 million in rebates from the government. these ceos also talk about the need for revenue, but of course, without specifics. >> in the long run, there has to be more revenue and, of course, the burden of that revenue will be disproportionately taken up by wealthier people. >> we collect $2.2 trillion in tax buzz we giveaway half of it in credits and deductions. the fact is, you need more revenue. >> the group calls itself the campaign top fix the debt and includes boeing and general electric. which along with honeywell will get big defense contracts. some former lawmakers including msnbc political analyst ed rendell for full disclosure are on the group's steering committee. the real issue is the position

taken by these corporate ceos. joining me now is e.j. dionne, washington post columnist and author of the book "our divided political heart." good to have you with us tonight. >> great to be with you. >> this looks like a publicity tour taking aim at earned benefits instead of corporate welfare. it's like these guys have the power to go out and command the camera and the exposure and to make share case that everybody else is the problem but their corporate welfare. how do you see it? >> well, i tell you, ed, one of the things that really bothers me is when these guys start talking about raising the retirement age and what do they have in mind? they have in mind people like ceos, people like us who talk and write for a living, i hope i'm talking to you for a good long time, but they don't think the about what this means for people who might work on their feet all day at a mcdonald's. i'd like to challenge these guys

if they want to call for an a later retirement age, let them go to work for a couple of weeks in a coal minor mcdonald's or in a car plant or as an orderly in a hospital. the other thing is that lower income people have not experienced that big increases in longevity. so raising the retirement age is something that hits them both ways. i've heard that the white house that put this on the table in the boehner talks last year is now backing away from that. and i hope that's true. but the broader story is, are they really willing to support rate increases on wealthy people? are they willing to support increases in capital gains tax? some people like warren buffett are willing to do, some high income people. it seems to me that's the price of admissions. if the only thing they mean when they say deficit reduction is cutting entitlements, that's not about deficit reduction. it's about cutting entitlements. >> the same guys that are at the trough for a bailout are now

experts what we ought to do with entitlement programs in this country. i find that amazing. then mr. blankfein, he throws out a scenario which is totally unrealistic. people don't have 25-year careers. they have 40-year careers is what they have. and construction people when they get in their early 50s and they've worked for 30 years, their bodies are broken down. >> exactly. >> what are they supposed to do? hang around for another 15 till medicare and medicaid show up? they're not even living in the real world. going after entitlements is basically paying lip service to the right wing. it's just romney 2.0. that's all it is. so what should liberals in this country be prepared to accept at this point as you see it? >> well, i really think that we should go back to the clinton rates, including the rates on capital gains which are still probably lower than they should be, and that's where we ought to start. if people want to talk about tax reform, let them do it after

that. and let them get specific. because there are certain forms of so-called tax reform that could really hammer the middle class. do we really want to get rid of the mortgage deduction in a way -- >> they can't go down that road. >> that will hit middle class people? >> first of all that, won't happen because the real estate lobby in washington is too strong. >> i think you're right about that. >> i wish that the country would stop talking about the mortgage deduction. it isn't going to happen. there's enough people in washington that are going to make sure. it's a good talking point for some people in the right wing to scare the hell out of middle class families to make them think they're really protecting them but they're not. these companies getting huge defense the cs are now experts what we ought to do with the budget. they're there protecting their own backside. that's the only way i see it. they don't want to give up any revenue whatsoever. as for social security, its solvent sit is extended well into 2033.

do we need to raise the cap right now? >> no, in fact, i think any move to put social security into this deal is going to hemorrhage a lot of support for any deal from liberals. i think that's a nonstarter. the defense budget has to be part of this, too. it's -- some of these rich guys are willing to put defense on the table, good for them. some of them may not be so wild about that. and you know, if defense isn't part of the deal, then again it's not a serious deal. we'll see what they do. >> i have to point out these are the big business leaders that are getting interviewed that have gone around talking about the insecurity in the market, insecurity in the economy. i don't know. the early reports, e.j. dion is that black friday was pretty damn good, the weekend was strong and cyber-monday is pretty good. this fear talk doesn't seem to be playing on the consumer right now. thanks so much. >> good to be with you. >> john mccain abruptly changes his tune on susan rice.

how does this guy have any credibility left whatsoever? mike it will tumaski has written about it and will weigh in next. then the republicans are finally getting real. we'll have the new revelations about their bid to block the vote. and what it means in, yes, the next election. stay tuned. we're on point. show."

little refresher course here.

john mccain said that he would do everything in his power to prevent u.n. ambassador susan rice from becoming secretary of state if nominated. in fact, mccain claimed that he would block not just rice but anyone the president nominated. yet, over the weekend, it must have been the turkey. mccain seemed to have a change of heart. >> she could conceivably get your vote for secretary of state? >> i think she deserves the ability and the opportunity to explain herself and her position just as she said. >> mccain has given up on blaming susan rice for the administration's response to the attacks on the consulate in benghazi. tomorrow, rice, along with acting cia director mike more rel, will meet with mccain, senators lindsey graham and kelly ayotte on capitol hill. now that mccain is open to the idea of hearings from rice, he's allegedly and he's alleging a white house cover-up on the matter, of course, a narrative already being pushed big-time on

fox news. fox of course, has devoted countless hours of air time to the benghazi storybooking guests to channel the conspiracy theory. but today something rare happened. fox news invited pulitzer prize winning journalist thomas risk to share his thoughts about the whole thing. he reports the truth for a living. needless to say his interview was cut short. >> senator john mccain has said in the past he would block any attempt to nominate susan rice to become u.n., i'm sorry, secretary of state. she's currently the u.n. ambassador. he seems to be backing away from that. what do you make of it? >> i think that benghazi generally was hyped by this network especially and that now that the campaign is over, i think he's backing off a little bit. they're not going to stop susan rice from being secretary of state. >> when the you the have four people dead, including the first u.s. ambassador in more than 30 years, how do you call that hype? >> how many security contractors died in iraq?

do you know? >> i don't. >> no, nobody does because nobody cared. we know that several hundred died but there was never an official count dochb security contractors dead in iraq. see when i see this focus on what was essentially a small fire fight, i think number one, i've covered a lot of fire fights. it's impossible to figure out what happens in them sometimes. second i think that the emphasis on benghazi has been extremely political partly because fox was operating as a wing of the republican party. >> all right, tom risk. thanks for joining us today. >> you're welcome. >> let's turn to michael tomasky, special correspondent for news week and "the daily beast." that was one for the archives. your latest column is on mccain's attacks on susan rice. it's very pointed. these twos stories go together because i think clearly, john mccain has bought into the propaganda that fox was pedaling out there. how do you see it. >> that's exactly the right thing to see, ed.

mccain made it clear in his statements over the previous couple weeks that he was going to make this a showdown between him and susan rice. he was going to say, i john mccain have the moral authority, i john mccain have the credibility to block susan rice if i want her to be blocked and by god, i'm going to do it, and then suddenly, yesterday, huh-uh, boy, he switched gears. boy did he back pedal at warp speed. >> huge. >> it was a fascinating thing to see. >> what's this meeting tomorrow all about? is this just another briefing for three senators that have taken issue with her performance? what's this about? what do you expect out of this meeting? >> i think it's a savvy political move by rice to say that -- to understand that you know, she does have to answer mccain's concerns because he still is to some people, not to me, but to some people, he still is john mccain with a lot of authority. and so she has to go see him. but i think she's going to come out of this meeting looking

fine. i think mccain is going to have a press conference tomorrow where he's going to say she probably -- that she answered his questions to his satisfaction and i think he's going to send the signal tomorrow afternoon that she's okay. >> maybe they'll compare academic records. i don't know if they'll get to that or not. you write that mccain should have zero credibility on susan rice and benghazi. why does the washington establishment always seem to turn to mccain for let's see what the godfather says here? that's kind of how it comes off. when does this guy become irrelevant other than holding a senate seat? >> yeah, ed, you know, he has been respected for a long time for his war service, for what happened to him in hanoi and for his early senate career when he was genuinely a senator who worked across party lines, worked on campaign finance, did things to anger his own party, did things to try and compromise with the other party.

took legislating seriously. he did buy a lot of credibility through those actions, but those are pretty ancient history now. it's been a long time, ever since 2000 when he lost to george bush. he was very mad about that loss but he became at that point for whatever reason a very, very loyal right wing republican and then especially after 2008 when he lost to obama and i think he was -- i think he took that personally. he still takes it very personally. then he had a primary from the right in 2010 and he became basically kind of a tea party guy. this transformation of john mccain has been a sad and difficult thing to watch, but there's a certain element of the washington establishment that still wants to hold on to that 1990s mccain and wants to pretend that he's still that guy. >> i think he's got to do a movie with clint eastwood. i do. michael tomasky, thanks so much. there's a lot more coming up in

the next half hour of "the ed show." stay with us. >> why is it you couldn't extend early voting. >> the right thing happened. >> florida republicans come clean on minority voter suppression. state senator nina turner responds top a new bombshell report. democrats didn't ask for the super pac fight but they plan to win it. >> democrats need to come in off the sidelines and get engaged if they haven't. >> we'll tell you about the new democratic plan to outgun republican super pacs. >> and why is this nfl mascot shaving the head of an indianapolis colts cheer leader? it's a great story. we'll tell you about it ahead. ♪ if it wasn't for you ♪ don't know what i'd do ♪ i'd have nothing to prove ♪ i'd have nothing to lose ♪ i'd be all lost at sea ♪ with no reason to make it through ♪ [ male announcer ] introducing the celebration diamond collection.

♪ if it wasn't for you [ male announcer ] diamonds so expertly cut, we guarantee them for life. zales is the diamond store. let love shine. open enrollment is here. the time to choose your medicare coverage begins october 15th and ends december 7th. so call to enroll in a plan that could give you the benefits and stability you're looking for, an aarp medicarecomplete plan insured through unitedhealthcare. what makes it complete? it can combines medicare parts a and b, which is your hospital and doctor coverage with part d prescription drug coverage, and more, all in one simple plan starting at a zero dollar monthly premium -- no more than what you already pay for medicare part b. an aarp medicarecomplete plan offers you benefits like an annual physical, preventive screenings and immunizations

for a $0 copay. you'll also have the flexibility to change doctors from a network of providers dedicated to helping you stay healthy. there's more. when you enroll in an aarp medicarecomplete plan insured through unitedhealthcare, your benefits could also include vision and hearing coverage, and prescription drug coverage accepted at pharmacies nationwide. the pharmacy saver program makes prescriptions available for as little at $2 at thousands of pharmacies. unitedhealthcare has worked with pharmacies in retail locations like these to get low costs for our members. when you enroll, you'll enjoy advantages like these for as low as a zero dollar monthly premium. this includes plans with part d prescription drug coverage. now is the time to look at your options start getting the benefits of an aarp medicarecomplete plan insured through unitedhealthcare. remember, open enrollment ends december 7th. call unitedhealthcare today

about an aarp medicarecomplete plan. you can even enroll right over the phone. or visit us online. don't wait. call now. and we are back. two more republicans are coming clean about voter suppression tactics in the state of florida. apparently, this is exactly what the republicans feared. republicans cut early voting hours as a result, some people

reported waiting six or seven hours to cast a ballot. now the palm beach post reports the republicans were hoping these folks would just go home. and just basically stay away. republican.consultant wayne birch says he knew targeting democrats was the goal. birch said "in 2008 when we started seeing the increase of turnout and the turnout operations that the democrats were doing in early voting, it certainly sent a chill down our spines. burge tells us tonight that they weren't targeting any specific bloc of democratic voters. another republican consultant says organizers in florida were intent on beating back democratic turnout in early voting after 2008. on the election on the night of the election, florida's own former governor charlie crist accused republicans of trying to block the vote. >> i think is the realty here is that you have people trying to suppress the vote in florida and across the country.

the reason is they feel like they have to rig the game in order to win the game. >> if you want to rig the game, these long voting lines are just a smaller part of a much bigger strategy. here's the voter suppression checklist. first, issue voter purge lists. well, florida tried it. the department of justice stepped in. second, shorten the deadline for voter registration. florida tried that too and a federal judge overturned the restriction and third, cut back early voting times to scare voters away from the polls. republicans in states like pennsylvania is, ohio tried similar suppression tactics. civil rights groups now want the justice department to investigate. we're told there's no investigation so far. we asked why not. the republican strategies didn't work this time, but believe me, folks, there's evidence that there's always going to be another election and they're going to be right back at it. joining us tonight, ohio state senator nina turner. good to have you with us

tonight. >> thanks, ed. >> this really is proof positive, this is the smoking gun, an actuality of exactly what they were up to. what's the game plan to defeat it. >> absolutely, ed. the voting advocates across this country knew this. i'm having a grandma moment right now. she used to say you can put truth in the river five days after a lie but truth will catch up. truth has caught up with the republicans tonight. the game plan is the feds need to step in. they have further proven in florida why need section 5 of the voting rights act to stay intact here and the fact that the supreme court is going to take that up. progressives all across this country should be outraged at the efforts of the gop to try to suppress the vote. and the only party that is standing up for voting rights in this country are the democrats. and we need some republicans to come onto the righteous side and stand up to their colleagues who are using their political clout

to suppress the vote. >> what about that? couldn't the democrats start introducing a bunch of laws on a state level and all of these states across the country that would be anti-voter suppression laws, enforce the republicans to legislatively take a stand on it. >> absolutely, ed. we should definitely do that and continue to unite with the voting advocates groups. we are not going to sit by and let them continue to push this kind of stuff. a number one lesson we should learn, what happened in 2010 cannot happen in 2014. we have midterm elections in congress but we also have general assemblies and governors mansions across the state where folks have to reup. they have to reup to the voters. we need to make sure that every voter understands clearly that folks who try to suppress the vote should not be in office. it is a malstrom of foolishness and the people cannot allow this to stand. these folks need to be voted out of office, ed. >> they do.

which brings me to the next question. are you going to run for secretary of state in the state of ohio? you know i am seriously considering that and i plan to make an announcement in january. the folks of this state need a secretary of state and not a secretary of suppression and ohio is ground zero as we found out in 2012. i am calling on not just the justice department but all of those on the federal level. we need their help on state levels to make sure that folks' votes are not suppressed. there is an election every single year. when i say it takes teamwork to make the dream work, i'm talking about the team of local officials on local, state and federal levels. we make the whole. and the republicans have proven if they cannot win the white house, they will try to steal and suppress the vote on the state level. but we're not going to let it stand. we're going to continue to fight. >> state senator nina turner from ohio. thanks so much. >> thanks, ed. >> coming up, things keep getting worse for the new york jets as a feign favorite calls

it quit. you can't lose this guy, can you? i'll tell you why tim tebow was involved. plus, some indianapolis colts cheerleaders made a big surprise for cancer research. we'll bring you a very heart-warming story. stay with us. axiron, the only underarm treatment for low t, can restore testosterone levels back to normal in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18. axiron can transfer to others through direct contact. women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant, and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur. report these signs and symptoms to your doctor if they occur. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. do not use if you have prostate or breast cancer. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet, or body swelling; enlarged or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs.

common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa. see your doctor, and for a 30-day free trial, go to axiron.com. >> we love hearing from our viewers on twitter @ed show and on our facebook page. many of you are responding to walmart's attempt to downplay protests by workers on friday. sue says she doesn't like walmart because of the way they treat their workers and run mom and pop stores out. dean says he hopes the workers strike gives a pay cut to the walton family. we need more made in america stuff anyway. keep sharing your thoughts with us on facebook and twitter using #ed show. coming up, one of the new york jets' biggest supporters is calling it quits, but it's not because of the team's losing

record. we'll have the details. stay with us. you know how to dance... with a deadline. and you...rent from national. because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle... and go. you can even take a full-size or above, and still pay the mid-size price. this is awesome. [ male announcer ] yes, it is, business pro. yes, it is. go national. go like a pro. time for citi price rewind. because your daughter really wants that pink castle thing. and you really don't want to pay more than you have to. only citi price rewind automatically searches for the lowest price. and if it finds one, you get refunded the difference. just use your citi card and register your purchase online. have a super sparkly day! ok. [ male announcer ] now all you need is a magic carriage. citi price rewind. buy now. save later.

can it get worse? just when you thought things couldn't get any worse for the jets, their unofficial mascot is hanging up the helmet. "fireman ed" is the super fan who has led the crowd in the jets chant since 1986. ed anzalone says he's quitting because some of the jets' fans can't behave at the stadium. after he chose to wear a mark sanchez jersey this year, tim tebow fans heckled him as the season went downhill. they thought fireman ed was on the jets payroll which wasn't true. finally things hit rock bottom during the jets loss to the patriots on thanksgiving. "fireman ed" left at halftime. he said in an article "i decided to leave thursday because the confrontations with other jets' fans have become more common even though most jets fans are

fantastic." fireman ed went on to say he's not quitting because the jets are in a rough patch and he'll continue to be a die-hard jets fan. meanwhile, a few indianapolis colts cheerleaders are in the spotlight for a in the spotlight for a more positive reason. the two colts cheerleaders had their heads shaved in front of 60,000 fans at the colts game on sunday. they did it to raise money for the cancer research after their head coach chuck pagano was diagnosed with leukemia back in september. the effort to bring awareness to leukemia research raised over $22,000 and the hair was donated for locks for love. if you want to make a donation to leukemia research, visit colts.com/chuckstrong. tonight in our survey, will democrats stand up for the middle class? 74% say yes, 26% say no. coming up, democrats are on the

offensive and gearing up for 2014. richard wolffe explain when is we come back. stay with us. [ male announcer ] this december, remember --

what starts with adding a friend... ♪ ...could end with adding a close friend.

the lexus december to remember sales event is on. this is the pursuit of perfection.

with his wife, danielle, almost every weekend. derrell hasn't been able to visit his mom back east in a long time. [ shirley ] things are sometimes a little tight around the house. i wasn't able to go to the wedding. [ emily jo ] since derrell couldn't get home, we decided to bring home to him and then just gave him a little bit of help finding his way. ♪ [ laughs ] [ applause ] i love you. i love you, too. in the big finish tonight, will rogers said i'm not a member of an organized party, i'm a democrat. but it's looking like 2012 just might be the year that the democrats really get their act together. after the 2008 election, president obama passed the stimulus bill, the health care reform and did it largely on his

own. his campaign was criticized for failing to harness the potential power of his army of supporters. tea party activists across the country rallied behind their candidates and took back the house in 2010. we know the old story. this year democrats have learned their lesson and are doing things quite differently. jim messina says obama for america intends to keep supporters engaged in the political process using the system built for obama's reelection effort to advocate for policy goals through e-mail updates, rallies and social media. one month after the election, democrats are already working on 2014 and they are looking to use the republicans own weapon against them. that would be big money. politico reported that nancy

pelosi, chuck schumer and top aids spoke at a secret meeting of major democratic donors and officials from liberal outside groups. the groups are courting in an effort to pass the legislative agenda and plan to help democrats keep the senate and take back the house in 2014. i'm joined tonight by political analyst richard wolffe, vice president of msnbc.com. what do you make of this? is this talk or is this really organized effort to make a difference in the midterms, to get really prepared for the midterms. >> it is an organized effort. they have learned their lessons. when they let this stuff die. the critical question on whether it will make a difference is what they ask. it's one thing to say we have to put out e-mails and keep you more engaged. the last time they said call your member of congress. that doesn't work great. they are used to being physically active in the real world.

the challenge is to try to do something that's real. get them to share, get them to make their videos. that's powerful. but you have to get them to do something real. that's actually where the tea party made a difference. people gathered in one place. they had a rally. but there's also something more they want. they want to do real work in their community, whether it's painting schools or cleaning up neighborhoods or working to get food. that's a real world at the end of this. >> why aren't the republicans any good at this? it seems the democrats are so much more contemporary when it comes to getting the job done. >> i think there's something about the sharing dynamic and community that fits the kind of people who are driven by progressive causes. they tend to be younger. there's a relationship between younger voters and their activity online. but the third piece of it, i think, is going to be hard for

republicans. when president obama was there and you could try to deny him a second term. that was their organizing principle. that is gone. it's going is to be harder this time around. especially as the economy gets better. >> it's going to take more than grass roots. it's great they are organizing and talking about it, but president obama had an innate ability to raise big money. can the democrats duplicate that? i mean there's going to be somebody coming along and inspiring people to the next level to keep this thing going. can it have an effect in the midterms? >> there's a difference between what president obama was doing in the end, and these big donors coming together in what mitt romney called the darkrooms. what you've got to have here is some of this big money sitting it out for 2016. they have to be focused on 2014 and try to win back especially the house seats. that's where the real difference

is going to come. if the president gets another honeymoon, it's going to be over by february. does he get a second? >> the finances of the country is very important. but demographically, immigration reform walks right into the democratic tent. this would be a big -- the right move, actually. politically the right move, but also important for the country. >> you're seeing a lot of movement from republicans on immigration. will it be far enough? you'll get a couple things here. that's where the pressure of the grass roots and the ad campaign that they may be funding. push for something bigger. republicans are already moving. now is the time to go bigger and not smaller on immigration. >> richard wolffe, great to have you with us tonight, thanks so much. that's "the ed show." i'm ed shultz. "the rachel maddow show" starts right now. >> good evening.

>> we need a quarterback in minnesota. i don't know where the quarterback was in green bay. they are playing the wrong quarterback in san francisco. you in new england, you have no quarterback problems. >> if i could cleave something off tom brady to help you out, you might, but you'd have to bribe me really bad. thank you to you at home for staying with us. we need to start with tom breaking news from washington, d.c. nbc news is reporting tonight that the new cia director, the one after david petraeus resigned recently, the acting director is going to be accompanying the u.n. ambassador susan rice tomorrow at a meeting that she is taking with republican senators. now this is important because it would appear to be laying the groundwork for susan rice's potential nomination for the position of secretary of state. susan rice to succeed the current secretary of state hillary clinton.